New Jersey (State Librarian specifically requested a visit and we decided to do by phone.) Profiles of these states will be included in the report. Karen Strege, former State Librarian in Montana, has been hired to conducted to do background research from their websites of all 15 states being studied and to conduct the telephone interviews for those states without field visits. A graduate student has also been hired to do background research on all 50 states.

+

* Maryland

+

* New Jersey (State Librarian specifically requested a visit and we decided to do by phone.)

+

+

Profiles of these states will be included in the report. Karen Strege, former State Librarian in Montana, has been hired to conducted to do background research from their websites of all 15 states being studied and to conduct the telephone interviews for those states without field visits. A graduate student has also been hired to do background research on all 50 states.

Criteria for states chosen for field visits

Criteria for states chosen for field visits

States chosen are:

States chosen are:

−

High Connetivity

+

+

===High Connetivity===

Ohio

Ohio

Missouri

Missouri

Line 36:

Line 40:

2. High Connectivity States both with and without a state network

2. High Connectivity States both with and without a state network

Three states have statewide networks but different configurations.

Three states have statewide networks but different configurations.

−

Ohio

+

*Ohio

−

Missouri

+

*Missouri

−

Kentucky

+

*Kentucky

One state does not have a network but does have high connectivity.

One state does not have a network but does have high connectivity.

−

Michigan

+

*Michigan

3. Choose two states with low connectivity but interest in getting higher connectivity for their states

3. Choose two states with low connectivity but interest in getting higher connectivity for their states

Summary

Criteria to use for selecting states
The group decided:
· send teams for extensive conversations in seven states
· conduct telephone interviews with states where we already have substantial information

States chosen for telephone interviews are:

Georgia

Florida

Connecticut

Maine

Wisconsin

Maryland

New Jersey (State Librarian specifically requested a visit and we decided to do by phone.)

Profiles of these states will be included in the report. Karen Strege, former State Librarian in Montana, has been hired to conducted to do background research from their websites of all 15 states being studied and to conduct the telephone interviews for those states without field visits. A graduate student has also been hired to do background research on all 50 states.
Criteria for states chosen for field visits
States chosen are:

High Connetivity

Ohio
Missouri
Michigan
Kentucky

High/Low

California

Low Connectivity

Kansas
Idaho

Criteria

1. States with data from McClure/Bertot Study or where we can get initial data on connectivity.
All states meet this criteria

2. High Connectivity States both with and without a state network
Three states have statewide networks but different configurations.
*Ohio
*Missouri
*Kentucky

One state does not have a network but does have high connectivity.

*Michigan

3. Choose two states with low connectivity but interest in getting higher connectivity for their states
Kansas and Idaho meet this criteria.
In addition, we chose California because it has a combination of high connectivity in certain geographical areas and low connectivity in others. Two project team members will be visiting New Mexico on other business and they will conduct limited interviews there.

4. Be aware of unintended consequences.
We want to make sure that our interviews and visits do not create untended negative consequences for the states we contact. We will address in three ways:
a. We won’t to into a state without the express approval of the state librarian.
b. We will assure that the state librarian knows that confidential information will not be shared except with the project team
c. We will ask the state librarian for suggestions of whom we might interview

5. Pick at least one state with video franchising
Not sure which states meet this. Who knows?

6. Pick at least one state with an Advance Services & Technology Fund?
Not sure which states meet this. Who knows?

7. Pick at least on state with its own State E-Rate program?
Not sure which state meet this. Who knows?

Introduction

Update from MW

Nancy sent out a summary report for our review

Surprised that no one had a vision—they just had ‘this is what my state is doing now’

State-wide perspective, it is a very small tail wagging a very wide dog—lots of player in states

Outside person said that they thought the focus groups were great & that the moderator was wonderful…helped them to think about their broadband

John Winhausen Update

We have had several meetings w/ the industry folks, think tanks and NARUC

Conclusions from meetings

Not enthusiasm for changing our policies

Current policies in place right now are sufficient

Barriers noted include lack of industry coming to the table

Telephone Companies had a couple of priorities

Tax Relief

Need for state-wide video franchises

Wi-Max could be the solution in Rural Areas

Verizon Fios build-out

RUS, department of Ag

Why do we need change?

Cable

”We’ve solved all your problems”

Increasing their capacity

Opposed to large-scale broadband plan

Unserved Areas vs. Underserved

Areas of agreement

Private v. Public partnerships

Connect Kentucky is a good example

Opposed to build out requirements

Less incentive to invest if we require them to give cheap access, but we could dictate a price if the broadband is already there

Rob Atkinson

State technology policy (including broadband) is coming out soon

E-Rate from meetings

We are in a period of data collection

Trying to probe into what is going on

Good Idea----states that have nearly 100% E-Rate participation is usually a state network. There is a lot of money left on the table b/c they do not apply for telecomm.

App window closes on February 2nd, so not probing much into participation

There are no rules/requirements that would prevent libraries from getting

1.2 out of 2.5 billion used for Priority 1

Priority 1 is funded before priority (and all Priority 1 is guaranteed funding)

If we stay silent, nothing will happen with that extra $1 billion

Priority 2 is inside wiring—libraries are rarely eligible for this $$$; mainly goes to schools

New construction=a good way to apply

John Bertot update from ALA

Regional networks are increasing role

Massachusetts—very large regional

State Selection Criteria

Criteria to use for selecting states

Where do we have good information from people on our team OR WITHWHOM WE HAVE A LOT OF CONTACTS?

THIS WOULD APPLY TO:
GEORGIA
FLORIDA
CONNECTICUT
MAINE
WISCONSIN
MARYLAND
WE WILL DO SOME RESEARCH FROM THEIR WEBSITES AND THEN DO A TELEPHONE INTERVIEW. WE HOPE TO INCLUDE THEM THE FINAL REPORT.

States with data from McClure/Bertot Study OR WHERE WE CAN GET THE DATA

WE HAVE FOR ALL THE STATE SELECTED

Choosing high connectivity states w/ and some w/out state network

WE CHOSE THREE HIGH CONNECTIVITY STATES WITH STATE NETWORKS BUT DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION
WE CHOSE ONE STATE WITH HIGH CONNECTIVITY BUT NOT STATE NETWORK
WE CHOSE TWO STATES WITH VERY LOW CONNECTIVITY

Unintended consequences, CAN WE ESTIMATE WHAT THEY ARE?

WE AGREED WE MUST WORK WITH THE STATE LIBRARIAN. IF THE STATE LIBRARIAN IS NOT WELCOMING, WE WON'T GO TO THAT STATE.

One suggestion for ‘Well connected’ NOT SURE WHAT THIS MEANS

One state network

OHIO
MISSOURI
KENTUCKY

One regional network

MICHIGAN

One ‘all on your own’

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ONE OF THESE

Video Franchising—background criteria THIS IS NOT A DECIDING CRITERIA

NOT SURE, DOES ANYONE KNOW?

Does a state have an Advances Services & Technology Fund? THIS IS NOT A DECIDING CRITERIA

NOT SURE, DOES ANYONE KNOW?

Does a state have its own State E-Rate program? THIS IS NOT A DECIDING CRITERIA

NOT SURE, DOES ANYONE KNOW?

Industry structure

I THINK WE JUST WANT TO EXPLORE DIFFRENT CONFIGURATIONS. THIS IS DATA WE NEED TO GATHER

Structure of state librarians office (who do they report to?)

THIS IS INFORMATION WE NEED TO COLLECT, NOT A DECIDING FACTOR

Willingness of state librarian’s office to participate

KEY CRITERIA, SEE ABOVE

NOTE: I THINK WE SHOULD INDICATE WHAT WERE MAJOR CRITERIA AND WHAT WERE MINOR CRITERIA. I THINK WE SHOULD COMPARE THE STATES TO THE CRITERIA JUST TO CHECK THAT WE GOT THEM ALL.

Exact Criteria

Do we already know enough?

Different models

State

Regional

On your own

Do we know of any unintended consequences?

Hard Data—from our data stores

Sustainability issue? Built early—going strong & growing

Video Franchising (Tie Breaker, may be too early to determine effect)

Industry structure

US Geographic Distribution

State Selection

During the selection of states, several were offered as candidates. The ones that were discussed by not selected include: Massachusetts, Illinois, New Jersey, Iowa, Nevada and Mississippi. These were removed from the list for a variety of reasons.

In the end, we selected the below states for visitation based upon states that were highly connected, less than ideally connected and a hybrid example.

States We Will Visit & Data on the Criteria for Selection

I THINK WE SHOULD PUT THE SPECIFIC DATA WE HAVE IN TERMS OF CONNECTIVITY INTO THE INFORMATION ABOUT EACH STATE. IF WE ARE GOING TO INCLUDE THE STATES WHERE WE HAVE TEAM MEMBERS, WE MIGHT WANT TO GET OUR COLLECTIVE INFORMATION TOGETHER FOR THOSE AS STATES AS WELL. KAREN WILL BE SEARCHING THEIR WEBSITES.

Connected

Kentucky

While Public Libraries and the Internet data doesn’t show high success in Rural areas, Urban & Sub-urban areas are almost all connected at 769 kpbs

All the policy people we have talked to in DC have been enthusiastic about the Connect Kentucky, so we would like to visit to find out why and if their model is a good one

Private/Public partnership

One of the first state networks

Southern State

Michigan

Regional networks for ten years; set up when regional E-Rate coordinators when they first came out

Not the same from Region to Region

$2 million out of E-Rate

Regional does all procurement

PL&I 50-50 rural; good in suburban and urban

Standards for libraries part of state metrics

Connectivity for libs is standardized @ state

Gave away rights of way at the state level a while ago, which is one of our policy options

Economic development people are interested in broadband development & removed from state, which is yet another policy option we are interested in

2 big telcos AT&T and Verizon split the state

Midwestern state

Really rural (e.g. Upper Peninsula) and urban environments

Missouri

Good state wide network that is shared by libraries, schools and K12 networks

State & local funding

Sustainability success

PL&I looks good (especially in rural where 77% of libraries are at greater than 768 kbps)—excellent response rate from survey

Video Franchising-Bills introduced on AT&Ts list as a state for reform

High funding from High-cost USAC

No state fund; no state Universal Service

Ohio

Good state wide network that is exclusively for libraries

Multiple state networks

Separate K12, Academic, and Library networks

PL&I good connectivity in Rural, Suburban and Urban areas

No State connectivity or State E-Rate funds

Has formula for bandwidth

State Library does a lot of E-Rate training (from Education perspective)

Midwestern state

Less Than Ideally Connected

Idaho

Good connectivity in suburban and urban, but low low rural connectivity

Low rural

State Tech fund

Kansas

Rural problems

State Universal Service

Diverse industry structure

On list

Hybrid

California

Has state fund…similar to Maine

Complication of state funding

Is working on policy implications from the states

Telecom policy is in the political debate

State Technology Funds & E-Rate funds

On their own and regional

Selected for High (well connected in urban areas and low connectivity in the northern part of the state)

States We will Touch Base With

Several states were not selected to visit for a variety of reasons, but have enthusiastic participants from the MW focus groups, good examples. We have selected states to have phone conversations with key people to gather additional information include:

Connecticut

Learned much information at MW Focus Groups

State Network

Good mix of libraries that are and aren't connected at greater than 769 kbps

New England/East Coast State

Florida

Excellent Regional Networks

Several people from Florida are on the OITP E-Rate Task Force and Telecom Sub-Committee

Bob Bocher is a key player in the state network and chair of the OITP Telecom Sub-committee, and is willing to provide whatever info is needed w/out a state visit

Additional State

New Mexico

John Bertot will be visiting New Mexico in March for Research purposes and has volunteered to collect data for us while he is there.. Further, Nancy Bolt will be at the New Mexico Library Association annual meeting in March, where she may be able to do a focus group or two.

In essence, NM will be an 8th state that we will have the potential to collect data from. Resaons for going to NM include: